REVIEWERS’ NOTES
Dear Prof. Maria Hayu Agustini,
We have pleasure in informing you that the reviewing process was copmleted. Here are the comments concerning your manuscript:
The manuscript corresponds PPM Journal scope and matches the topic 'Data Collection and Data Estimation'. The level of English is appropriate and of publishing standards.
The most of the key words are appropriate, however, some of them (such as internationalization, International business, enhancement techniques etc.) are quite generic; besides it would be better to highligt the key words relevant to data collection .
The role of theory is evident, however theoretical framewor could be more sufficient and celarly defined.
The research approach is appropriate, but research methods could be explained more clearly and argued in the context of the research questions.
In addition:
1. More JEL Codes should be added.
2. Although the research methods are pointed out in the text, the manuscript doesn`t contain such a section.
3. The results are not properly substantiated. Moreover, the manuscript doesn`t contain any tables, figures, graphs, etc. to prove the results.
4. The conclusion section looks rather theoretically.
5. The reference list should include more relevant literature, e.g. internet sources.
So you are kindly requested to study this material and work on the comments as the paper is very interesting with minor revisions.
Please revise the paper according to the above mentioned referees’ comments (strikethrough font for all deleted text and red marked symbols for inserted text) and send me back a revised version of the paper along with a separate file named Response to the Reviewers (please explaine point by point all made revisions; in case of inponsibility of performance of some point please state the reasons).
Please make references list active (insert clickable link if literature source can be found online) in case it is applicable for the source. http://businessperspectives.org/sample-articles-and- instructions
I should greatly appreciate an early reply.
RESPONSE TO THE REVIEWERS
Dear the Reviewers,
First of all, I would like to thank you for your valuable suggestions. I agree your suggestions can increase the quality of the manuscript since I might miss some details. In order not to miss any single of your suggestions, allow me to response in sequence as follows.
1. I thank you that the manuscript is considerably in the PPM Journal scope, topic, and publication standards. I have tried to comply with them in order to possibly give appropriate contribution to the journal.
2. Regarding to the keywords, I do agree to highlight those relevant to data collection since it is the main topic of the manuscript and some of them to be more specific. For following this up, I change some of the keywords into more specific ones by combining two into one (i.e.
response rate and enhancement techniques become response rate enhancement techniques), deleting those that are irrelevant to the data collection (i.e. small firms and internationalization), modifying it (i.e. international business becomes international business research), and adding a new one (i.e. nonresponse bias). The new one is to emphasize the common problem in a survey.
3. In order to define theoretical framework more clearly, the paragraphs in the literature review are devided into sub-sections and a subheading is applied for each sub-section. The subheadings are intended to give clear picture about the framework. Further elaborations are given to the section in order to define the concept more sufficiently.
4. I have added another JEL Code, that is F2 that covers international business to identify the context of the manuscript. Searching for more codes did not result in other relevant codes.
Thus, there are only two relevant codes: M16 and F2.
5. Since the manuscript is more a conceptual paper intending to propose alternate method for survey in relation to response-rate issue, I intentionally did not provide the research methods section in the writing organization. Even though, it was built based on a research but it does not specifically address the research itself. It rather focuses on survey and its common problem (i.e. low response-rate) and how to deal with it. Thus, research methods section is possibly equally to the result and it is already argued in the context of the purpose of the paper.
6. A table summarizing the methods and the response-rate is added. The table can possibly substantiate the result more clearly, that is survey by knocking the door can reach high response-rate compared to other surveys.
7. The conclusion section is intended to show a proposed survey method (i.e. survey by knocking the door) for IB research. It may look rather theoretically because of conceptual
arguments given to support the conclusion. It actually addresses practical implications in applying the survey method (advantages and disadvantages).
8. Regarding to the reference, I added some relevant literature from the internet sources in the list.
I hope the revisions have addressed all the issues and satisfy your expectation. Anything need to be followed up further, please don’t hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely yours, Maria Hayu Agustini
LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
«CONSULTING PUBLISHING COMPANY
«BUSINESS PERSPECTIVES»
Hryhorii Skovoroda lane, 10, Sumy, 40022, Ukraine http://businessperspectives.org
Phone: +380 542 221707 [email protected]
18th of April, 2018
Maria Hayu Agustini
Dr., Faculty of Economics and Business Soegijapranata Catholic University Semarang
Indonesia
ACCEPTANCE LETTER
Dear Maria Hayu Agustini,
We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript “SURVEY BY KNOCKING‐THE‐DOOR AND RESPONSE‐RATE EN‐
HANCEMENT TECHNIQUE IN INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS RESEARCH” has been double blind peer‐reviewed and accepted for publication in the international journal “Problems and Perspectives in Management”, which is sched‐
uled to be published in Volume 16, Issue 2, 2018.
With cordial regards, Viktoriia Koilo
Editorial Assistant
International research journal
“Problems and Perspectives in Management”
E‐mail: [email protected]
REVIEWERS’ NOTES
Dear Prof. Maria Hayu Agustini,
We have pleasure in informing you that the reviewing process was copmleted. Here are the comments concerning your manuscript:
The manuscript corresponds PPM Journal scope and matches the topic 'Data Collection and Data Estimation'. The level of English is appropriate and of publishing standards.
The most of the key words are appropriate, however, some of them (such as internationalization, International business, enhancement techniques etc.) are quite generic; besides it would be better to highligt the key words relevant to data collection .
The role of theory is evident, however theoretical framewor could be more sufficient and celarly defined.
The research approach is appropriate, but research methods could be explained more clearly and argued in the context of the research questions.
In addition:
1. More JEL Codes should be added.
2. Although the research methods are pointed out in the text, the manuscript doesn`t contain such a section.
3. The results are not properly substantiated. Moreover, the manuscript doesn`t contain any tables, figures, graphs, etc. to prove the results.
4. The conclusion section looks rather theoretically.
5. The reference list should include more relevant literature, e.g. internet sources.
So you are kindly requested to study this material and work on the comments as the paper is very interesting with minor revisions.
Please revise the paper according to the above mentioned referees’ comments (strikethrough font for all deleted text and red marked symbols for inserted text) and send me back a revised version of the paper along with a separate file named Response to the Reviewers (please explaine point by point all made revisions; in case of inponsibility of performance of some point please state the reasons).
Please make references list active (insert clickable link if literature source can be found online) in case it is applicable for the source. http://businessperspectives.org/sample-articles-and- instructions
I should greatly appreciate an early reply.
RESPONSE TO THE REVIEWERS
Dear the Reviewers,
First of all, I would like to thank you for your valuable suggestions. I agree your suggestions can increase the quality of the manuscript since I might miss some details. In order not to miss any single of your suggestions, allow me to response in sequence as follows.
1. I thank you that the manuscript is considerably in the PPM Journal scope, topic, and publication standards. I have tried to comply with them in order to possibly give appropriate contribution to the journal.
2. Regarding to the keywords, I do agree to highlight those relevant to data collection since it is the main topic of the manuscript and some of them to be more specific. For following this up, I change some of the keywords into more specific ones by combining two into one (i.e.
response rate and enhancement techniques become response rate enhancement techniques), deleting those that are irrelevant to the data collection (i.e. small firms and internationalization), modifying it (i.e. international business becomes international business research), and adding a new one (i.e. nonresponse bias). The new one is to emphasize the common problem in a survey.
3. In order to define theoretical framework more clearly, the paragraphs in the literature review are devided into sub-sections and a subheading is applied for each sub-section. The subheadings are intended to give clear picture about the framework. Further elaborations are given to the section in order to define the concept more sufficiently.
4. I have added another JEL Code, that is F2 that covers international business to identify the context of the manuscript. Searching for more codes did not result in other relevant codes.
Thus, there are only two relevant codes: M16 and F2.
5. Since the manuscript is more a conceptual paper intending to propose alternate method for survey in relation to response-rate issue, I intentionally did not provide the research methods section in the writing organization. Even though, it was built based on a research but it does not specifically address the research itself. It rather focuses on survey and its common problem (i.e. low response-rate) and how to deal with it. Thus, research methods section is possibly equally to the result and it is already argued in the context of the purpose of the paper.
6. A table summarizing the methods and the response-rate is added. The table can possibly substantiate the result more clearly, that is survey by knocking the door can reach high response-rate compared to other surveys.
7. The conclusion section is intended to show a proposed survey method (i.e. survey by knocking the door) for IB research. It may look rather theoretically because of conceptual
arguments given to support the conclusion. It actually addresses practical implications in applying the survey method (advantages and disadvantages).
8. Regarding to the reference, I added some relevant literature from the internet sources in the list.
I hope the revisions have addressed all the issues and satisfy your expectation. Anything need to be followed up further, please don’t hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely yours, Maria Hayu Agustini
usiness Perspectives https://businessperspectives.org/componenUzoolanderV?controlleror...
Order 364
Details
td User Billing
Shipping Created on Last updated Payment Method Order State Gustomer Notes
The payment of the article prccessing charge for the manuscript titled "SURVEY BY KNOCKING-THE-DOOR AND RESPONSE-RATE ENHANCEMENT TECHN IQU E I N I NTERNATIONAL BUSI N ESS RESEARCH"
Items
364
.lllaria Yosephine Dwi Hayu Agustini [email protected]
Jl. Pawiyatan Luhur lV/1 Bendan Duwur, Semarang, SOz3,/,lndonesia
Sunday, 29 April 2O18 11:07 Sunday, 29 April 201811:12 0pc
Suceessfully created
Item Name
Problems and Percpectives in Management
clan > APG for the authors with affliation in lower middleincome co.lntries
PaymentF*
Shipping
Fx
Drlscouats SuDtotal Iaxes fofel
Quantity
1
Unit Pribe
€495.00
Total
€495.00
€0.(n co.(n
€o.(n
€195-(n
€o.(n
€1!r5.(n
I of2 4129D018,6:06PM
hAs:/lbusinesryaryoctive*.
1
4l292:0lt,6:06PM
ffirs
PsyEer$Adpd
ti 18042914{35015 { ;p" . €495.@
Sunday, 29 April 2o1B t1:12l.
I
I
2 af,2
BUSIN 855 PERSFECTIVES
Hryhorii Skovoroda lane, IQ Sum% ztOO22, Ukraipe Phone: +38O542227707
LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
(CONSULTING
PUBLISHINGCOMPANY
<t BUSIN ESS PERSPECTIVESD
httg://businessoerspectirres. org
PUBLICATION AGREEMENT
LLC "CPC "Business Perspectives", hereinafter - "Publisher" and Maria Hayu Agustini (Dr., Faculty of Economics and Busi- ness, Soegijapranata Catholic University, Semarang lndonesia) hereinafter- "Autho/' agree on the following
L. The Publisher agrees to publish thq manuscript paper "SURVEY BY KNOCKING-THE-DOOR AND RESPONSE-RATE EN- HANCEMENT TECHNIQUE lN INTERItATIONAL BUSINESS RESEARCH" by the Author as an open-access manuscript (ar- ticle freely accessible for everyone upon publication) in the journal "Problems and Perspectives in Management'' (ISSN 1727-7OSt (print), 1810-5467 (online)), hereinafter - 'Journal".
2.
The Author confirms that there is no conflict of interest to be declared. Please check the box if you agree with this statement.V
lf otherwise, it should be stated in the box below.
3.
The Author guarantees that names of all co-authors of thb paper'are listed properly and in the right order, and their identities haven't been falsified {including the Author}. The Author confirms to have been authorized to sign this agree- ment on behalf of all co-authors.4.
The Author certifies that all material in the manuscript is original; ahy parts of it have never been published before, and have not been submitted or accepted for publication elsewhere.5.
The Author retains copyright tothe contents of the article, grants the Publisherthe rightforthe first publication of the article, and agrees on the distribution of the published article under conditions ofeither
or: allows content to be copied, adapted, displayed, distributed, re- published or otherwise re-used for any purpose including for adaptation and commercial use provided the content is attributed.
: allows content to be copied, adapted, dis- played, distributed, republished or otherwise re-used provided the purpose of these activities is not for com- mercial use and the content is attributed. Commercial use means use of the content by a commercial organi- zation or individual for direct or indirect gain or remuneration.
Please choose the license by the appropriate box (if no license is chosen, CC BY-NC 4.0 will be assigned):
cc BY 4.0 cc BY-NC4.o
checking
